I don't know how many times Scooby came on here before Dans injury saying he looks like he is skating in mud. Dan got beat to the outside many many times.

Again what is it that you love so much about this guy that wants to see the same top four reunited?
- VANTEL

Because he is better at hockey than most other player we have? Do you honestly think he was the problem? Or Tanev or Edler?

We had/have absolutely no D depth, taking away the only decent players isn't the solution.... adding more competent players is.

I am not advocating Hamhuis be back, but you nailed it. Without Hamhuis scheduled to be back, those 4 that were in over their heads are poised for more of the same next season unless they drastically improve, which is unrealistic.

I like Demers as Plan A, Hamhuis as plan B to solidify the top 4
- WhiteLie

In my ideal world they bring back both and move Sbisa, but I'm not advocating Hamhuis' return either but I don't understand the concept that bringing him back makes us worse.

Edler Demers
Hutton Tanev
Hamhuis Tryamkin
Larsen

Because he is better at hockey than most other player we have? Do you honestly think he was the problem? Or Tanev or Edler?

We had/have absolutely no D depth, taking away the only decent players isn't the solution.... adding more competent players is.
- belcherbd

I think we have to play Pedan or move him- requires waivers.

Losing Biega wouldn't be a big loss, except we have no depth on D once he is gone.

Not sure if Larssen has signed yet? when he does, will he need to go on waivers to be sent to the AHL?

With Edler, Tanev, Hutton and Sbisa, that is our d corps moving forward.

If Hamhuis is resigned, I'd expect to see someone moved.

I think if you bring in Demers, Hamhuis isn't back... but your suggested d looks interesting.

I think we have to play Pedan or move him- requires waivers.

Losing Biega wouldn't be a big loss, except we have no depth on D once he is gone.

Not sure if Larssen has signed yet? when he does, will he need to go on waivers to be sent to the AHL?

With Edler, Tanev, Hutton and Sbisa, that is our d corps moving forward.

If Hamhuis is resigned, I'd expect to see someone moved.

I think if you bring in Demers, Hamhuis isn't back... but your suggested d looks interesting.
- hillbillydeluxe

This is part of why I hope to see Hamhuis back. He becomes more of a need if someone gets moved, so if he is resigned I hope that means someone is sold for a high return

Because he is better at hockey than most other player we have? Do you honestly think he was the problem? Or Tanev or Edler?

We had/have absolutely no D depth, taking away the only decent players isn't the solution.... adding more competent players is.
- belcherbd

Considering the youth of Tanev, Hutton, Tryamkin. They need some cheap journey men D. Ben Lovejoy, David Schlemko.

Because he is better at hockey than most other player we have? Do you honestly think he was the problem? Or Tanev or Edler?

We had/have absolutely no D depth, taking away the only decent players isn't the solution.... adding more competent players is.
- belcherbd

Here is my problem with the Canucks D.

You need a different mix to have a complete DCore.

I will classify them as this.

A) The point getter, good shot , puck mover , goal scorer, fast exciting, high end .

B) The safe slower, Jack of all trades master of none, defender , reliable

C) The workhorse, the one that battles in front , fights big hits.

D) The one you plug holes with . Not good at anything really putting in time so far.

Edler B
Tanev B
Hamhuis B
Hutton B
Tryamkin B
Pedan C +D
Bartowski D
Sbisa C and D
Biega C and D ( with heart)

We need better Cs and As

This is part of why I hope to see Hamhuis back. He becomes more of a need if someone gets moved, so if he is resigned I hope that means someone is sold for a high return
- WhiteLie

I don't see Edler waiving, leaving the only ones that would get a high return are Tanev, Hutton or maybe Tryamkin....

moving Pedan or Biega won't see much of a return and Sbisa is talked about having a terrible contract and difficult to move.

His office does have 4 walls.
- A_SteamingLombardi

I don't see Edler waiving, leaving the only ones that would get a high return are Tanev, Hutton or maybe Tryamkin....

moving Pedan or Biega won't see much of a return and Sbisa is talked about having a terrible contract and difficult to move.
- hillbillydeluxe

Can you imagine the outrage if Tryamkin or Hutton are moved?
The rest might not be key pieces in a deal but could be part of a package, particularly if salary is retained

I don't see Edler waiving, leaving the only ones that would get a high return are Tanev, Hutton or maybe Tryamkin....

moving Pedan or Biega won't see much of a return and Sbisa is talked about having a terrible contract and difficult to move.
- hillbillydeluxe

Pedan and Biega would probably clear waivers everytime.

Can you imagine the outrage if Tryamkin or Hutton are moved?
The rest might not be key pieces in a deal but could be part of a package, particularly if salary is retained
- WhiteLie

Why would there be outrage? If it is an outstanding deal Canucks shout not have untouchables.

If Winnipeg offered Laine for Tryamkin, I would jump at that.

Why would their be outrage? If it is an outstanding deal Canucks shout not have untouchables.

If Winnipeg offered Laine for Tryamkin, I. Would jump at that.
- VANTEL

lol at least make a realistic offer.

Pedan and Biega would probably clear waivers everytime.
- manvanfan

FC part deux

Maybe Biega would clear but if there is team with holes on their back end and cap issues, I could see them taking a chance on either one.

Does anyone know if Larssen will require waivers to be sent to Utica?

lol at least make a realistic offer.
- manvanfan

Jets would have to add a pick.

FC part deux

Maybe Biega would clear but if there is team with holes on their back end and cap issues, I could see them taking a chance on either one.

Does anyone know if Larssen will require waivers to be sent to Utica?
- hillbillydeluxe

yeah he would.

Why would there be outrage? If it is an outstanding deal Canucks shout not have untouchables.

If Winnipeg offered Laine for Tryamkin, I would jump at that.
- VANTEL

As amazing as that would be, you know that if that deal was made there would still be people that would say something like "well if Tryamkin gets you Laine, why not use him as a trade chip to acquire a top D prospect instead" or "here we go selling our first promising D prospect, a future Chara, for a winger which could be acquired much more easily" or "With another forward prospect and now less on D we are looking like the second coming of the Oilers"

Here is my problem with the Canucks D.

You need a different mix to have a complete DCore.

I will classify them as this.

A) The point getter, good shot , puck mover , goal scorer, fast exciting, high end .

B) The safe slower, Jack of all trades master of none, defender , reliable

C) The workhorse, the one that battles in front , fights big hits.

D) The one you plug holes with . Not good at anything really putting in time so far.

Edler B
Tanev B
Hamhuis B
Hutton B
Tryamkin B
Pedan C +D
Bartowski D
Sbisa C and D
Biega C and D ( with heart)

We need better Cs and As
- VANTEL

Id take some of that allocated money for forward and get yandle.

As amazing as that would be, you know that if that deal was made there would still be people that would say something like "well if Tryamkin gets you Laine, why not use him as a trade chip to acquire a top D prospect instead"
- WhiteLie

yup

yeah he would.
- manvanfan

Such a hole in our prospects, not having any d that might be able to step up that don't require waivers. Maybe this is a similar challenge with many clubs and d usually taking longer to develop.

Don't know where we'd be without Tryamkin and Hutton.

Such a hole in our prospects, not having any d that might be able to step up that don't require waivers. Maybe this is a similar challenge with many clubs and d usually taking longer to develop.

Don't know where we'd be without Tryamkin and Hutton.
- hillbillydeluxe

Well when you go 10 years without drafting a D in the first couple of rounds, bound to have holes.

Such a hole in our prospects, not having any d that might be able to step up that don't require waivers. Maybe this is a similar challenge with many clubs and d usually taking longer to develop.

Don't know where we'd be without Tryamkin and Hutton.
- hillbillydeluxe

Trading our first rounds for Ballard

Trading our first rounds for Ballard
- VANTEL

trading second rounds for derek roy.

Trading our first rounds for Ballard
- VANTEL

So draft party at Daniel Sedins former home? I'll bring the box of wine.

So draft party at Daniel Sedins former home? I'll bring the box of wine.

- SRam19

This year at Leftys new BBQ

Well when you go 10 years without drafting a D in the first couple of rounds, bound to have holes.
- manvanfan

The funny thing is we had two 1st round d-men (Sbisa & Hamhuis)

Edler, Pedan and Weber are all 3rd rounders